Gordon Brown will today face questions over claims that he denied funds needed
by the Armed Forces to fight in Iraq.

The Prime Minister will testify to Sir John Chilcot’s inquiry into the war against Saddam Hussein, which has taken evidence suggesting that, as Chancellor, Mr Brown denied the Forces the money required properly to fund their operations.

When Mr Brown announced the Iraq inquiry last year, his aides believed it would deliver political benefits for the Prime Minister, allowing him to contrast his premiership with that of Tony Blair and placate some voters angry at Labour over the war.

Instead, the inquiry has emerged as a potential threat to Mr Brown, allowing former ministers, officials and commanders to raise questions about his record of supporting the Armed Forces as Chancellor.

In evidence to the inquiry, Geoff Hoon, the former defence secretary, has said that Mr Brown did not fully fund defence.

Mr Hoon said that in 2003, the then-chancellor, insisted in a reduction in the Ministry of Defence budget which forced him to make “difficult cuts” in orders for equipment including helicopters.

Mr Hoon told the Iraq Inquiry that if the Treasury had not imposed those cuts on the MoD, the Armed Forces would have more helicopters today.

Sir Kevin Tebbit, the former permanent secretary at the Ministry of Defence told the inquiry that he had been left operating a “crisis budget” in the summer of 2003 after Mr Brown imposed a “complete guillotine” on the defence budget.

General Lord Walker, the chief of the defence staff from 2003 to 2006, told the inquiry that in 2004, Britain’s senior commanders threatened to resign over cuts in defence spending sought by Mr Brown’s Treasury.

Recalling a list of proposed cuts, Lord Walker said: "We drew a line somewhere halfway down the page and said, 'If you go any further than that you will probably have to look for a new set of chiefs'."

Like Mr Hoon, Lord Walker focused on helicopter capacity, pointing out that at the time the 2004 cuts were proposed, the Armed Forces were 38 per cent short of the helicopter capacity they were supposed to have.

The 2004 spending settlement led the MoD to reduce sharply its spending on helicopters.

Official figures show that spending on new helicopters fell by half. In 2001/02, the MoD budget for “helicopter procurement” was £842 million. It hit a low point of £209 million in 2006/07 and in 2008/09, it was £448 million.

Mr Brown has repeatedly rejected criticism of his record on defence, insisting that overall spending on defence – the MoD budget and reserve funds used to fund Iraq and Afghanistan – has risen consistently.

A Downing Street spokesman said: "It is incontrovertible that the defence budget has gone up in that period."

No 10 said that Mr Brown will also meet privately with the families of Service personnel killed in Iraq who attend the inquiry at Westminster's Queen Elizabeth II centre. When he gave evidence last month, Mr Blair was accused of snubbing requests for a similar meeting.

In an evidence session scheduled to last around five hours, Mr Brown may also face questions about the planning and funding of post-war relief work in Iraq.

Clare Short, the former international development inquiry has told the inquiry that her department’s work in Iraq was hampered by a shortage of funds.

Miss Short told the inquiry Mr Brown’s Treasury told her “there is no money, money is very tight.”

Mr Brown had originally been scheduled testify to the inquiry after the general election. But pressure from the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats led Sir John to call the Prime Minister earlier.

Downing Street has said that Mr Brown is eager to give evidence and to defend the original decision to invade Iraq.

However, Mr Brown has signalled he will take a different approach to that of Mr Blair.

Rather than justifying the war on the grounds of a potential military threat from Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, Mr Brown says the invasion was necessary to uphold international law and the authority of the United Nations.

He said: "There have been so many accusations that he knowingly underfunded defence, that he blocked equipment orders, cut the budget while we were at war, and played politics with announcements of troop numbers. He must be held to account for these decisions, some of which may have had tragic consequences.”